Lazy-H98 Report post Posted March 9, 2017 I sure hope they can strike a compromise. We have all seen the pics of trail cameras lined up like mailboxes on the strip drinkers that give the opposition fuel for their fire. Heck I'm just a blue collar guy who runs 3 soon to be 4 low end cameras. The kids and I enjoy checking and viewing the cards. It sure helps getting through the year during the lulls. Maybe I can slap a "for educational purposes only" sticker on them and be safe. So where else are we going to get Jaguar pics from? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trphyhntr Report post Posted March 10, 2017 why does it matter that theres multiple cams on a water source? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CatfishKev Report post Posted March 10, 2017 So what would prevent the anti's from placing cameras at every water source? If they wanna waste the money on one and have game and fish confiscate it I'm all for that. It will probably get stolen or broken anyway if its up past the deadline. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Allforelk Report post Posted March 10, 2017 How would a WM be able to check every drinker, tank and spring in a given unit during any hunt on the books? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DesertBull Report post Posted March 10, 2017 why does it matter that theres multiple cams on a water source? Because guys need something to complain about 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muledeerarea33? Report post Posted March 10, 2017 What if the camera captured a "new" jaguar that could be used as ammo against Trumps border wall? Or another new species that's found? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
G_E_E Report post Posted March 10, 2017 After loosing multiple locked cams to theft, I stopped putting my cams on major tanks that can be easily driven too. Too many POS out there. I look for trails near by. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted March 10, 2017 They only come in at night anyway, find a good trail. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
elkaholic Report post Posted March 10, 2017 its gonna be a new law ! so lets make sure that words like passive camera and point water source have a defined definition in the regulations so there is no misunderstanding exactly what they mean -- including the officers in the field ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AZ8 Report post Posted March 10, 2017 They've already covered their bases. The definitions are clearly stated in the proposals. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AZ8 Report post Posted March 10, 2017 From the Feburary meeting notes. Go to page 13. I'd imagine the final approval from the March meeting will mirror these. https://portal.azgfd.stagingaz.gov/PortalImages/files/commission/2017/2017_02_3-4%20Comm%20Mtg%20Minutes.pdf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bonecollector777 Report post Posted March 10, 2017 Reading the minutes looks like the ban is going to cover any water source except wallows. They clarify what they meant regarding point water source by basically saying any water source where there is always water. Looks like the quarter mile from a house with a bow is gonna pass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Sparky Report post Posted March 10, 2017 This is going to be unenforceable and won't make trail cameras disappear from water holes. The wording leaves a big loophole. I put out trail cams and don't see anything wrong with putting them out. I would say I have never killed an animal I have on trail cam pictures. "Prohibit the use of passive trail cameras for the purpose of taking or aiding in the take of wildlife within one-fourth mile of a developed water source or point water source." For the purpose of taking or aiding in the take of wildlife means they are going to have to have a confession on intent of use. Let's say I put a trail cam out on a water source. G&F hires somebody to go take down any trail cams within 1/4 mile of water. Illegal seizure under the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. My intent was to capture Mexican Grey Wolfs on a trail cam, a species you can't take, thereby not being used for the purpose defined. Maybe I wanted to get bears or cougars, species I don't hunt. Now let's say they drive by and I am checking the camera and they give me a ticket. Number one rule is don't say anything, go to court where they have the burden of proof. They can't prove what the intent was, just a camera was there, case dismissed. Same thing with anybody taking down trail cameras around a water source. It is not illegal to have them out, it is illegal to have them out for the purpose of taking or aid in taking wildlife. So you are still a thief if you take down a trail camera because you don't know what the intent is. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sneaker Report post Posted March 10, 2017 Is there an Arizona salt company I can hurry up and buy stock in? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
300RUM Report post Posted March 10, 2017 Let's say I put a trail cam out on a water source. G&F hires somebody to go take down any trail cams within 1/4 mile of water. Illegal seizure under the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. You have no right under the 4th amendment to place your possessions on public property, abandon them there, and expect that government agent, or anyone else, not remove them. No warrant is required, no search is being conducted and nothing is being seized. Legally, all that is happening is that litter is being removed from public property. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
